


^ 




— OF— 

DAUPHIN COUNTY. 



Read bffore the Dauphin County Histori- 
cal Society, November: 1871, by 

GEO. WASHINGTON HARRIS, Esq. 



/S"^ 



The county of Daupliin was set off from 
Lancaster county in the year 1785. Be- 
fore the adoption of the constitution in 
1790 the courts were held before judges 
who were not lavv'yers by profession — sucli 
as Timothy Green, Samuel Tows, Jona- 1 
than IM'Clure. John Joseph Henry was t 
commissioned in December, 1793, (See ' 
Morgan's annals of Harrisburg.) f 

Jiidgo Henry was, I understand, a na- 
tive of Lancaster county. He was a large 
man, perhaps above six feet in height, and 
he was lame from a rheumatic affection, 
contracted probably when in the military 
service. He had been in the Revolutionary 
army, and was in the Quebec expedition 
in 1775, and subsequently wrote a narrative 
of that expedition, which is now a scarce 
book. I do not distinctly recollect of ever 
seeing him. I know nothing personally of 
his ability as a judge, but never heard it 
questioned. He presided, in the year 1798, 
at the trial of Hauer and McManus for the 
murder of Francis Shitz ; and from the re- 
port of that case I would judge quite fa- 
vorably of his capacity. He also wrote 
the will of George Frey for the founda- 
tion of the Emaus orphan house. He 
died when in Lancaster, Lancaster county 
forming a part of his judicial district. His 
family lived in Harrisburg after his death 
for several years, and several of his daugh- 
ters were zealous, active members of the 
Methodist church. 

The case of Haner and M'Manus, as I 
have intimated, was reported. It was one 
of the most interesting murder trials which 
ever took place in the State. It was de- 
vised by Hauer for the destruction of the 
lives of Francis and Peter Shitz, his 
brothers-in-law, by whose death he de- 
sired his wife to come into possession 
of a considerable estate. M'Manus was a 
young Irishman, who, when executed, was 
not twenty-one years of age. He had led 
rather an irregular life in his own country, 
and was seduceol into this outrage through 
Patrick Donagan, who lived for a time 
with John Hauer. Donagan and otliers 
were also indicted for the murder, but 
none were convicted but Haner and Mc- 
Manus. 



V 



u. 



A degree of ability was displayed by the 
counsel in this case which has seldom 
been equalled at any criminal trial in the 
interior of this state. Charles Smith, of 
Lancaster, Charles Hall, of Sunbury, and 
Matthew Ilenrv, who, I understand, was 
a brother of Judge Henry, were concerned 
on the part of the commonwealth. Thomas 
Duncan, of Carlisle, afterward Judge 
Duncan, of our Supreme Court, James 
Hopkins, William Montgomer, of liancas- 
ter, George Clymer, of Reading, who had 
been a member of the convention which 
formed the constitutioii of the United 
States, and Messrs. Fisher, Elder and 
Laird, of Harrisburg, were concerned tor 
various of the prisoners. Me.ssrs. Dun- 
can, Fisher, Elder, Laird and Clymer 
were concerned for Ilauer. 

A bill had been at first found against 
John Hauer and Peter M'Donough as 
principals, and against Patrick Donagan, 
Francis! Cox, Hugh M'Donough and Eliza- 
beth Ilauer, who was the wife of John 
llpuer, as accessories before the fact. 

Hauer was put upon trial. It was in- 
tended, on his trial, to use M'Manus a wit- 
ness on the part of the commonwealth, as 
he alleged that the murder had been com- 
mitted by Haner and Peter M'Donough, 
whilst he held their horses at the end of 
the lane. But on the trial Ilauer sent for 
the president and Judge Gloninger and 
made a confession of his guilt as an acces- 
sory before the fact,but denied that he was 
present at the commission of the murder 
which he alleged had been committed by 
M'Manus and"^ Peter M'Donough, and that 
the rest of the prisoners were acces- 
sory before the fact. It appearing prob- 
able that M'Manus was present at the mur- 
der and was the person wlio shot the de-^ 
ceased, he was not examined as a witness 
on the trial of Hauer. The jury was dis- 
charged from giving a verdict as to Haner 
and the cases were continued until tWiext' 
term. In this proceeding the-colrajeil of 
Haner declined to interfere as they \\m not 
been cowsulted by Ilauer as to his jConfes- 
sion,and theyconsidered that hehftn,by that 
act, taken his case out of their hands. 
At the next term a bill was found against 
M'Manus as the person who conniiitted5» 
the murder with a pistol or axe, and one 
against Hauer and others j^ar procuring., 
and abetting it. ^/ V 

M'Manus was tried anil^^victe^ on hist 
awn confession. W-m ■ . . 

When the case of Hfeilt anfl others 
was called up it was objectP<t%y Duncan, 
Fisiier and Clymer, that llauii was 'in Jaw 
discharged, as the jury in his caSQ^ajt. the 
former term had been discharged without 
his consent and it was alleged that he could . 
not be but, in jeopardy of life twice for the i 
same offense. Able and learned arguments 
v.'ere made by them, and by Mr. Hall and i 
Suiith on the part of the Commonwealth. 
It was contended by them that the proceed- I 
ing which should bar a second trial must be 
an actual acquittal by° verdict on the gen- 
eral issue (p. 35); and further that there 
must have been a verdict of not guilty on an 
indictment free fromlerjul error, and that in 
this case of Hauer, the first indictment was 
defective, it not having been alleged 
in it that Thomas Shetz died of the looiinds 
received. Judge Henry held that sucli 
omission was fatal to the indictment and 
was conclusive in the matter; and that it 
was therefore uirneccssary to decide the 
other question. As Ilauer therefore could 
not have, been legally cor.'ucted on the first 
indictment, his case and that of Donegau 
and Ct)v jWas called up. On being called 



on to i^eaa iiauer stood muie. iiie court 
considering that he stool mute from ohsli- 
nacy, directed the plea of not guilty to be 
entered for him. . 

Donegan and Cox objected to being tried 
with Haver ; but the court decided that 
the matter was within the dicretion of 
the prosecuting officer, and they were ac- 
cordingly tried together. The confession of 
Iiauer was used against him, and the testi- 
mony given as to Donegan and Cox. 
Hauer was convicted, and Donegan and 
Cox acouitted. A bill was found against 
the wife of Iiauer and Hugh M'Donougli, 
but no evidence was given on the part of the 
Commonwealth and they were acquitted. It 
would appear to me probable that if Iiauer 
had not made confession of his guilt, he 
would not have been convicted; as the per- 
sons present in the room where Fran- 
cis Shetz was killed, (he first was shot 
with a pistol and then struck with an axe) 



could not identify the murderers, they hav- 
ing their faces concealed and the candle in 
the room being extinguished by accident. 

The case was another illustration of the 
sayiug that "murder will out." Asobserved 
by Webster in the Crowningsshield ease, 
the secret is often too deep for conceal- 
ment, and must be confessed. Iiauer, in 
this case confessed and acknowledged his 
written confession on being arraigned on 
the^^r.^^ indictment; but when arraigned on 
the sewnd indictment he did not speak, and 
never spoke publicly afterwards, and was 
eventually hanged without publicly assert- 
ing a word. 

It is, however, worthy of remark that 
when the jury were ready to deliver their 
verdict and the clerk proclaimed, "John 
Iiauer, hold up your hand," he held it up. 

M'Manus made a confession subse- 
quently, which was published. In this 
he persisted that he was not present at the 
house when the murder was committed, 
but that he held the horse at the end of the 
lane. He also declared that when Iiauer 
and himself were confined in the same 
apartment in the jail Hauer declared that 
he would behave in such a manner as to 
induce a belief that he was insane. 

A report of the trial was published by 
Mr. Wyeth, from which I have made up 
this statement: 

Iiauer and M'Manus were executed on 
Capitol hill in July, 1798. 

Judge Henry was followed in the judicial 
oftice by Walter Franklin, of Ijancaster, 
who Wiis commissioned on the 18th Janu- 
ary, 1811. He lived in Lancaster when 
appointed by Governor Snyder. He was 
considered by the profession as incompe- 
tent. He was a man of very gentlemanly 
appearance, was perhaps possessed of con- 
siderable legal knowledge, but was inef- 
ficient as a judge, and his judicial admin- 
istration was "not satisfactory to the law 
either in this county or in Lancaster coun- 
ty, where he afterwards presided. When 
acting as judge in Lancaster county at 
least two attempts were made before the 
legislature to effect his removal, either by 
address or impeachment. On one of those 



occasions he was defended by James Hop- ■ 
kins, a veteran attorney of Lancaster. "^ 
During the proceeding one of the managers 
of the" house concluded his address late in 
the afternoon. Mr. Hopkins rose and 
asked that the House adjourn till the next 
day to afford him an opportunity for more 
special preparation. The house, however, 
was fatigued with the length of the pro- 
ceeding and refused to adjourn, and Mr. 
Hopkins, being obliged to proceed, rose 
and stated that he would divide his pro- 
posed argument into a considerable num- 
ber of heads, and the first head of his ar- 
irunif'jf into various rarts A member 
numediately rose and moved that the house 
adjourn in order to afford to the council an 
opportunity to condense; and the house ac- 
cordingly adjwurned. 

On the first proceeding before the legis- 
lature in his case the judge came oiT suc- 
cessfully, but on a second or third proceed- 
ing it was said that he h;(d written 
on both sides of some political question; 
and this was considered to be so grave an 
olfence, that, fearing a more unfavorable 
result, the judge resigned. 
In one of the proceedings against Judge 
Franklin, one of the 'managers on the 
part of the house was Andrew Stewart, of 
Fayette county, who was a candidate for 
congress in 1870, against Mr. Foster, the 
present member, and Mr. Stewart is prob- 
ably the last survivor of the legislature to 
which I have referred. On one of the 
same proceedings, perhaps the same one, 
against Judge Franklin, my old friend 
Kichard Coulter, afterwards a judge in the 
supreme court, was also a manager on the 
part (-tf the house. He was frequently po- 
etic in speech and in writing. I recollect 
one of his figures on the occasion referred 
to. He said substantially that the judiciary 
of Pennsylvania should be like the guar- 
dian angel of old, standing on the battle- 
ments of the constituti<m, waving the 
sword of justice to and fro, to keep cor- 
ruption from its base. 

As I was on quite friendly terms with 
Judge Coulter during my appointment as^ 
reporter, I desire to be excused for refer- 
ring in this place to another eloquent pas- 
sage from one of his judicial opinions. It 
is in his opinion, in the case of Snpplee vs. 
Hansen, reported in 5 Harris Keports, 388- 
9. An individual granted a piece of ground 
for the erection of a church and for the use 
of a burial ground, reserving the right to 
him and his wife to build a vault or vaults 
In it, and to keep the same in repair. 
Some of the grand children had an- 
other vault made, appropriating four 
burial lots on the ground. This was 
objected to by the trustees of 
the church, and the decision of the Su- 
preme Court was adverse to the claim of 

Judge Coulter, who delivered the opin- 
ion in the case, observed "there is room 
yet in the family sepulchre ; but if 
the grand children do not like the cold and 
lonely damjiness of that place, but prefer 
that their narrow house should be visited 
by the glimpses of the sun and moon, and 
be fanned by the breezes, (and the thoughts 
and feelings of this life often linger about 
the grave), they can enjoy that preference 
by being buried as most other people are 
buried, and like other members of the 
church, in the bosom of mother earth, 
with.the green sod over them " 




>ssor of Judge Franklin was 
Amgs.Ellniaker. He was born in Earl 
t.,|<-.wflship, Lancaster count}^, on the 2il of 
I February, 1787. After graduating at 
Pcinceton he studied law for one year with 
James Hopkins, of Lancaster; tljen a year 
at the Litchfield law school, and con- 
cluded his studies with Thomas Elder, of 
this place, whose daughter he married. 
He was admitted to the bar at December 
term 1808. He was elected to congress, but 

' der of a connnission as a judge of Ihe Su- 
preme Court. He CDntinued in the practice 
of thelaw at Harrisburg until his re 
moval to Lancaster in June 1821. 
He went to Baltimore in the year 1814, as 
an aid to General Foster. lie was com- 
missioned as judge in July, 1815 and occu- 
pied the bench till December, 18ifi. He 
was reputed to be a good lawyer His ad- 
dresses to the jury, when at the bar, were 
clear, distiHct and argumentative, but by 
no means oratorical. He left the bench in 
December, 1816, for what reason, I do not 
know. He held an elevated position here, 
and was appointed attorney general by 
Governor Findiay. He, however, contract- 
ed the odium of the Governor's friends by 
refusing to defend him before the legisla- 
ture, when unjustly assailed by a Phila- 
delphia faction, headed by the celebrated 
John Binns. This refusal may have been 
owing to the fact that Mr. Thomas Elder, 
his father-in-law, was one of those who 
urged the prosecution. 

The governor was defended bv George 
M. Dallas, of Philadelphia. The chair- 
man of the committee of the house was 
William Wilkins, of Pittsburg, who made 
a report favorable to Governor Findiay, 
Mr. Wilkins was afterward rewarded for 
his action by appointment as a judge in 
the Pittsburg aistrict, to fill a vacancy, op- 
portunely for him, happening through the 
death of Judge lloberts, a few days, per- 
haps within two days before the termina- 
tion of Governor Findlay's oflicial term. 



He was appointed on the 18th of Decem- 
ber 1820, Mr. Findiay having been inaugu- 
rated on the 16th of December, 1817, his 
executive term being for three years. 

Mr. Ellmaker, as before observed, after- 
ward removed to Lancaster and was, after 
the lapse of some years, a candidate for 
the Vice Presidency on the ticket with the 
celebrated William Wirt. He died in No- 
vember, 1851. 

Mr. Ellmaker was succeeded as judge 
by David Scott, who was appointed by 
Governor Snyder, and was commissioned 
in December, 1816. He was a native of 
New England, but was settled in Bradford 
county at the time of his ai)pointment. 
He is said to have been a good lawy(>r. He 
is also said to have been pugnacious in his 
temper. I have heard it observed that if 
lie had been in military life he would most 
probably have been distinguished. I have 
no recollection of ever seeing Iiith on the 
bench, but saw him after he had left Har- 
risburg as his place of residence, and when 
I saw him he was somewhat deaf. He re- 
signed his jjosition as judge of this dis- 
trict, having been appointed to another 
district in the northern part of the state, 
and was succeeded by Samuel 1). Franks, 
J who was commissioned in July, 1818. 



Knowing little oTJUage Scott, I addressed 
Judge Woodward, Ifte of our Supreme 
Court, for information as to him. 

Judge Woodwards atesthat Judge Scott 
was a native of Com ecticut, and that he 
settled in Bradford m unty. When Judge 
Scott was appointed 1 1 this judicial district, 
Judge Gibson was ttte president judge in 
the Bradford TOStrl^to which he had boon 
appointed by Goverudr Snyder. A va- 
cancy happening on the supreme bench. 
Judge Gibson was appointed by Governor 
Snyder as a supreme judge, and Judge 
Burnside was appointed to the Bradford 
district, then consistingof the counties of 
Luzerne, Pike, Wayne, Susquehanna and 
liradford. Judge Burnside after presid- 
ing in that district for above a year, re- 
signed, and Judge Scott was appointed, 
the district having been reduced to the 
counties of Luzerne, Pike and Wayne. 
Judge Woodward states that Judge Scott 
presided in that district with greet ability 
until the year 1838. when in consequence 
of increasing deafness, he resigned in fa- 
vor of Nathaniel B. Eldred; but Governor 
Ritner appointed Judge Jessup instead of 
Mr. Eldred. Judge Scott lived severai 
years afterwards, and died at AVilkesbarre. 
Judge Woodward states that Judge Scott, 
whilst on the bench, also acted as canal 
commissioner for several years, but with- 
out compensation; and Judge Woodward 
further writes that Judge Scott was a man 
of great clearness and force of intellect. 
He had not been thoroughly educated 
either in literature or law, but he supplied 
his deficiences by application and force of 
character. He v/as an honest, upright judge 
— a littleoverbearingsometimes,and always 
of irascible temper; and on the whole an ex- 
cellent officer both as judge and canal com- 
missioner. He was the founder of the 
Episcopal church in Wilkesbarre and in- 
stituted, in his office, there the first Sunday 
school that was organized in northeastern 
Penusylv\jnia. , 

Judge Scott was succeeded in this dis- 
trict by Judge Frank's, who was commis- 
sioned" by Governor Findiay in 1818. 
I Samuel D. Franks and (reorge 1'. I'or 
ter, the first of Reading, and the latter ot 
Lancaster, had been in the military service, 
having gone to Baltinuu'e in lAl4, when 
it was threatened l^y the British forces. 
They v^«^re imt engaged in any battle, but 
when the legislature met, after the Penn- 
sylvania forces, volunteers and militia, 
liad returned home, the two came to Har- 
risburg, and both clerks of the house, as I 
think, not having gone into the military 
service, they were elected clerk and assis- 
tant clerk of the house of representatives. 
They were efficient officers, and Franks was 
an excellent reader. He was uselul to the 
members and was quite poi)niar. It was 
unfortunate for him tiiat he did not con- 
tinue in that position; but after the elec- 
tion of Xv. Findley as governor he applied 
for appointment "as judge, tiiat being at 
I that time an ai)pointnient during good be- 
I havior. Ho was possessed of consid- 
erable talent, and it was supposed that 
with industry he miglit make a respecta- 
ble judge, and uulortunately h(! was ap- 
, pointed. He was an auuising companion. 
lie had considerable talent for mimicry, 
and if he had adopter' the stage as his pur- 
suit in life, he probably would have been 
distingushed as a comic actor. He was 
possessed of much humor, and abounded 
in anecdotes. I have heard of one told by 
him relative to a chirge by an associate 
judge to a jury in Lehigh county. 



C 



A man wae on trial before the asso-.ate 
iudaS for some offense. The evidence dui 
not sliow him to be siuilty, but the judae 
chaS the jury thalthough the case wf 
doubtful they miaktas well convict the 
Sendant, forthpiere had. beeii a great 
ripal of rascality Sfout there lately. 
'^' have al?o hla^ that he was called on 
for a toast on an ^^"^"Itura occa- 
sion about rhiladelphia; and that he 
gave as a sentiment, '"Agricultural ^ocuv 
ties- the liampart of American Industry 
and' the Bau'imrk of National ludepen- 

'^'ne was a large man, with a large head; 
and though not handsome, yet had a fine 
f?ce He had a large Grecian nose, a 
tlorkl countenance and red hair. He sa d 

ewasf e best red (or read) judge in 
Peinsvlvania. lUit the lavv as a science 
ha fcAV charms for him. The busmess of 
the court languished excessively whilst he 
was in oflice, perhaps not more than twenty 
verdicts being taken in a jean Ihe 
younger members of the bar, of whom 1 
was one, suffered in consequence and aft^i 

wo attempts before the legislature we 
succeeded in having him displaced. He 

whSirtook place b^ore him which excited 
considerable iutere.t at the tune. 

A p.'rson in Karrisnurg who had been 
Hrrrpiv e-iL'a^ed in speculation m real e^- 
tatS die" m'^olvent. 'judge Bucher, who 
was an associate jud.e on the benci^w.th 

Tn.lcrp Franks, aduiuiistered on tie et, 
tale Ml- Elder brought a considerable 

fimberof suits a.aiust ^he. admiuistra- 
> tor, wl- emn^ MK ^S^^^v^ 

?he usYial time, on Settling the docket 
i dements bv default svere taker.. Aft; r 

I Shears Mr. El.J'er issued writs of scire 
S\o revive t/e judgments. Judge 
liucher became /alarmed and, on Mi 

' F sher being caHed upon, he a^ked o hav _ , 
the iud"mei;l!S opened and the plea of 
tne ■l"'.'»'"^7:^,-„i ■..-, This was objected 
want of assyts put m. i'"= V " .,J. ^: „ 
to by Mr. pdex, who alleged that the time 
for such i>leading was passed, iln^gave 
£etoa)?ngtlienedaiscussion Ma^^^^^^^^^ 
in arLniytig his moticm, produced man> au- 
thorities Mr. Elder, in turn produced 
othe Jand Mr. Fisher rejoined. In tlie 
se3 ai-gument, in -^<^^^^^^:^ 
in(/(,n the cases adduced byMr. i^icui, 
■SJ Fisher cited other author ties. Mn 
Sex claimed the .right ^ re,.ly to tlrn^e 

Slditional authorities, a"?' ,";,^"i^\, ^nl 
fisher objected, alleging t'^^t /le was en 
titled to conclude the argument, Mr. ElUei 






A 



was heard. In the course of his reply he 
also adduced new authorities. Mr. Fisher, 
in turn, claimed the right to reply to them. 
The court would get wearied with the dis- 
cussion, and would occasionally adjourn 
for days or a week or more, and after these 
see-sawing, turn-about- Jim-Crow-opera- 
tions, the judgments were opened and the 
administrator let into a defence, and this 
terminated tiie contest. The case was so 
long in argument that it was said that du- 
ring the period of discussion Mr. Elder 
went to Lykens Valley and Mr. Fisher 
built a barn. 

This attempt to compel an administrator 
to pay out of his estate the debts of an in- 
solvent decedent was rather an ungracious 
jiroceeding; and it has since been enacted, 
that, "no 'mispleading or lack of pleading" 
shall render any executor or administra- 
tor personally liable bej'ond the amount of 
assets of the estate received or receivable 
by him. 

During the pn\sidency of Judge Franks 
Tom M'Ellienny was tried for the mur- 
der of Sophia German. This case excited 
very considerables interest at the time. He 
had been a candidate for the sheriffalty, 
and desired to be a candidate at the next 
election. On the morningof the day when 
she disappeared, M'Elhenny had an inter- 
view with her at her residence, and it was 
offered, on the part of the commonwealth, 
to show that when on the same day, and 
after M'Elhenny had gone, she was about 
to leave with her child, of which he was 
reputed to be the father, she said she was 
going to meet M'Elhenny, in pursuance of 

nu cxrrtvnpoiiioiit witK Uliii. Tlilo vvao OVCl- 

ruled by the court; and there being no di- 
rect evidence against him he was acquitted 
by the jury. He was not, however, acquit- 
ted by public sentiment. 

The manner of discovering the body of 
Sophia German was very singular. After 
she had been missing for several days, 
a man was walking along the hill bordering 
Swatara creek. A dog, which he had with 
him, ran down the hill and barked. The 
man went down to see the cause of it, and 
found that the dog was barking at a do- 
mestic cat on a tree. On his return to 
the path he saw a bonnet, which he lifted 
and hung upon a tree. The bonnet be- 
ing subseciuenly shown to the mother of 
Sojihia Garinan, she pronounced it to 
bethat of her daughter. Search was 
soou made along the side of the hill for 
the body of Sophia Gannan ; and on 
going along, some one laid hold of a 
bush, which drew out of the ground, and 
on examinaiion the body of Sophia Gar- 
man and her child were found in the same 
grave. 



(!Triviii Blythe siaxruku Judge Franks 
He was a native of Adams county, 
in tliis state. lie had settled at the town 
of Mifflin, in Mifflin county, where he was 
elected to the house of representatives, and 
was subsequently appointed attorney gen- 
eral by Gov«sior Shulze, the appointment 
being made on the 5th of February, 1828. 
lie was also secretary of the common- 
wealth under the same executive. lie was 
a man of medium size, of respectable ap- 
pearance; was possessed of excellent un- 
derstanding, and was of undoubted integ- 
rity. He was well versed in legal princi- 
])les; but not in a knowledge of cases, from 
tlie fact o his practice in tlie law having 
been interrupted by several official posi- 
tions. He was indulgent to tlie bar, rather 
diffuse in his charges to the jury, and fre- 
quently was considered too lenient in the 
punishment of criminals. But he never 
avoided responsibility and acted on the 
ease in hand to the best of his judgment. 
He was much respected in this community. 
He received the appointment of collector 
of customs at Philadelphia, and resigned 
his judicial of^2e. 

1 reqjember an incident which occurrod 
in the court house during the presidency 
of Judge Blythe, which was of an amus- 
ing character and which tended to ihow 
the deUberateness and unexcitability of the 
judge. 

A civil case was on trial — Mr. Alexan- 
der, or Carlisle, was one of the coun.sel, 
and the elder M'lidyre, of Perry county, 
were probably a witness. Suddenly a loud 
crash was heard, and it seemed as if the 
upper floor and ceiling of the court room 
was giving way. The jury, 'counsel, 
witnesses and spectators rushed to the 
door. 1 was amongst them, and as I went 
out of the room, turned my head and 
looked back, but saw no dislocation of the 
bnildinff, but in the excitement 1 kept on 
until I reached the pavement. M'intyre 
contnuh'd on across the street, and he was 
without his hat. I went back to the court 
room, and the house was as we left it, but 
it had been cleared by all except the judge 
and as 1 have since been told, by Mr. Alex- 
ani '-'dge merely rose and walk- 

ed . "ow which looked into 

the y^. .lat was the matter. 

When ti. ■ ce was investigated, it 

appeared thai, .i. front wall of the cellar 
in the j-ard of the court house was lined 
with boards or plank, and that a cart load 
of coal had been dumped down upon it; 
and this produced tUe noise which sounded 
like the crash of the building. The judge 
and Mr. Alexander it would seem, were 
the only persons present who were not 
frightened. The affair when understood, 
alforded much amusement. 

Judge Blythe was succees^led by James 
M. Porter. •.*'■ 

Judge Porter was a good looking man. 
rather above the common 'sii;e.''-lle was 
mther a vain ma'-, entertaining a high 
oj ion of his own capacity: \ lie wa'^, 
however, considered to be an excellent 
lawyer and he was jjosscssed of great in- 
dustry. He was a brother of (iovernor 
Porter, and was appointed by hiiu, it was 
supposed, to settle some jwlitical matters 
which had happened in the course of his 
election. lie held the oftice for about a 

ear and a half, when he was succeeded 

y Anson V. Parsons. Judge Porter was 
I^or a while secretary of war under Presi- 
'dent Tyler, but was not confirmed by the 
senate. , — r- , 



Judge Parsons was from one of the New 
England s ates, and when a young man 
settled at Williamsport, where he resided 
when appointed as judge. He was abovl 
the medium size, of thin vissage, was pos- 
sessed of st'aniboat energy, in the ses- 
sions was a rigid disciplinarian, and iu 
that respect contrasts 1 stroiiglv with Judge 
Blythe, who was rather mild iii his judicial 
action in the sessions. 

Judge I'arsons was transferred to Phila- 
delphia, and Judge Blythe was then reap- 
pointed to this district and remained until 
he was again appointed to the custom 
house at Philadelphia under the adminis- 
tration of President Tyler. After he was 
superseded in that position, he engaged in 
the practice of law in Philadelphia, where 
I became associated with him in the prac- 
tice. He became paralized and soon after 
died. 

Judge Blythe was an honest man, was 
possessed of a kind disposition; but was too 
generous, liberal and inconsiderate for his 
own interest; and though he received a 
considerable amount of money as collector 
of the port of Philadelphia, yet he died 
poor. He was a soldier in the war of 1812, 
and was in the battle of Bridgewater, and 
at the subsequent attack on the fort at 
Lake Erie. 
He was succeeded as judge by Xathan- 



^ 



iel B. Eldred— who was appointed in 
March, 1843. 

Judge P:idred was a man of medium 
size, of an angular face, rather un- 
handsome, but of a genial expression. 
He was of a social disposition. He came 
from Wayne county iu this state. He was 
a man of integrity, and was considered by- 
Chief Justice Gibson, to beposscssed of ex- 
cellent legal judgment. But he could 
scarcely be considered a profound lawyer. 
Whilst occuppying his judicial position he 
was engaged in business matters else- 
where. He was extensively engaged in 
lumber operations in the west, which in- 
duced his absence and thus interfered ma- 
terially with his attention to ids official 
duties. He was translated to the Wayne 
County district, and was succeeded 
by the present judge, John J. Pear- 
son, who was appointed by (rovernor 
Johnston iu April, 1.S4!». After the 
termination of the period for which he 
was commissioned he was elected to the- 
I same position in October, 18,51, and was- 
1 subsequently re-elected and is stillin office 
having been again re-elected at the h'&t 
election. 

These repeated elections, and aU withmW 
any oppoxing amdidatoi, are highly credita- 
ble to him as evidence of the estimation, 
for legal iiualilicatiou and judicial integ- 
rity, in which he is held by the people of 
the district in which he has so long lu-esided. 
It is also proper to remark that, in addi- 
tion to the ordinary business of the drst- 
trict, it has been his province to preside on 
appeals from the decision of the account- 
ing officers of the State— a branch of busi- 
ness not only arduous to him but of great 
importanci! to tlie revenues of the Com- 
luoiiweulth. This has rench'red him widely 
kuowu not only throughout the State, but 
beyond it. 



Judge Pearson was born in Delaware 
county, in this state, but in his infancv 
was taken by his father to Mercer gouu- 
ty. where he read law and was ad- 
nntted to practice, and was residinf' 
in Mercer county wlieu appointed as 
judge for this district in 1849. He had 
been elected to congress for one term 
serving there during the administration of 
Crcneral Jackson, and was a member of 
our state senate during the administration 
of Governor Ritner. He has also held 
courts in other districts, and his ability as 
a judge IS generally acknowledged. lie i« 
perhaps better acquainted with the land 
laws, which prevailed in western Pennsyl- 
vania, than any other man now living 
Titles were held in various counties west. 
of the Allegheny under the laws of Vir- 
gmia, Maryland and Pennsylvania, under 
the conllict of jurisdiction prevailing as to 
portions of that region. 

In addition to the preceding jud<res 
Dauphin county, for a while, liad a Dis- 
trict court, in which cases were tried 
where the value in controversy was of a de- 
hned amount, perhaps $500. The place 
was, f(n- a while, occupied by Judgfi Brad- 
ford,from Sunbury, who was considered as 
an inefficient judge. He afterwards pre- 
sided in the York district. Charles Smith 
from Lancaster, was also, for a while, oiir 
district judge. He was the compiler of the 
tirst five volumes of the laws of Pennsyl- 
vania, and the author of a learned nute"in 
volume two of tliMt work relative to the 
land laws of the state. He was a >u|)erior 
lawyer and was prompt and decisive in his 
action as judge. 

Thedistrict court sprang from the arrear- 
age of business on tile dockets o( the 
county, and was dispensed with when its- 
existence was no longer re(piired. The 
judges of theSJupreme Court also torawhile 
held circuit courrs here an I m other parts 
(ft the Stite. An appeal from their decis- 
ion lay to the court iu banc. It was a 

couVts' rin^'rlfP"'^^'^^''' '" relation to thf..«,^ 
courts, tn<iL the judge wi,u m, ,i ,ii,. eaiisp 
inthec.uirt below^gene.allv ad u're.l o 
the opinion expressed on the triaV Tl ? 
ettect usually was. that, as far as his onin! 
"•n was concerned, the case was not a r^ 

op.nion^'ThV''"^^''"'^"'^'' "^ l"^s' prevhu^" 
op.nion. itie same u>a"e exists in the s;„ 
preme Court of the Uuired state " e ci?" 
cuit ju.lge before whom she case was tried 

bc.i,igp,vsent at the final decisis o/^;;;? 

1 ,j ,'" ^ consider a usa<'e wliieh 

should be abrogated. It th,: ^Snpiime 

udges try causes, they s^hould ha e no 

ot appointing district circuit huUy^ 
whose rulings maybe reviewed by ^^u' 
pieme tribunal (,f which they form no «af 

aSlSeS.^^'^ "-'^-*^^-i« 

It may not be considered as alto<-ether 

r^mal-''hf''i"'''"''"^'«'>'to ."afesome 
remaiksin relation to one aspect of or 

iilav?/^''/''^'-'^? "^« estab/ishment or 
It may *opn be with n the control of ti.i 
l^eople by an alteration of the'cli^stifution! 



Under the present constitution the Su- 
preme Judges are elected for fifteen years,, 
and the President Judges of the common 
pleas for ten years. There is no constitu- 
tional limit as to age. 

Now it may happen that an individual,, 
either already on the bench, or off of it, 
may reasonably be considered competent 
to the performance of judicial duties for a 
less term than the term for which judges 
are elective, and yet not for the full 
term, and the probability that he may 
become disabled, \<y the infirmities of age, 
short of the term for which judges are 
elective, may jirevent the pul)lic enjoy- 
ment of his services for a period during 
which he may be entirely competent. This 
objection was made to our present presi- 
dent judgw previous to his last re-election,, 
and its I'ffect, in future cases, may be met 
by an alteration of the constitution. 

By the Constitution of New York, some 
years ago, the age of sixty years was fixed 
as the limit of the tenure of judges, and 
under it Chancellor Kent, then in the fulR 
vigor of mind, was displaced. That age- 
may reasonably be considered as too early. 
But it may be considered as worthy of 
consideration, whether, without fixing any 
age at which judges shall arbitrarily be- 
retired, it may not be provided that a 
judge who, by reason of infirmity in body 
or mind. Is disabled from the performance 
of his judicial duties, may be allowed, 
on resigning, to receive either full or half 
pay for life, if it be short of the term for 
which he was elected; or for the full term-, 
if he lives so long, or for some other period,, 
to be fixed in the Constitution. Whether 
this shall be limited to such judges as have 
served a definite period may be consid- 
ered. 

Pensions for mere civil service may, in- 
general, be highly objectionable; but the- 
effectual administration of the law, in 
which the interests of society are so deeply 
involved, may, perhaps, justify an excep- 
tion in favor of the judicial department of 
the government. This principle has been 
lately adopted by congress in relation to- 
disabled judges of the Supreme Court of 
the United States, who, being appointed' 
during good behavior, are not removable- 
except by address or impeachment; and: 
> Under the act passed on the subject Judge- 
'""jrier resigned his position on the bench of 
that court. 
Nov. ly, 1871. 




t 



*N 



LIBRftRY OF CONGRESS 



014 311 351 9 



Consa-vation Resources 
Lig-Free® Type I 
Pb 8.5, Buffered 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



014 311 361 9 




Conservation Resources 
Lig-Free® Type I 
Pb S.5, Buffered 



